Alternate US States

[Mr. Smith]

To all who speculate California going Atlas Red, while such is possible, it could be a while given that this state clearly is a misplaced Southern State. Depending on how far Fresno and Sacramento grow rather than rural areas or pseudo cities like Downeyville the state could be like North Carolina, or like Alabama.

Plumas County may as well be a stand in for Georgia given its straight Democrat record from 1928-1976 and one final Clinton nod in 1992.

And the state probably voted for Stevenson in 1956, or at least gave Eisenhower a plurality victory and was one the closest in 1952 for Ike too.

[Antonio the Sixth]

And now, ladies and gentlemen... five years, four months and six days after the start of this thread... it is my pleasure to introduce you to our 51st and final State!

California del Sur

Like the RL State it is carved from, California del Sur has the distinction of being - by far - the most populous State in the country. With 21 million inhabitants enumerated in the 2010 census, it is still bigger than any RL State besides California and Texas. Compared to OTL CA, its rise to the forefront is delayed by a decade: while IRL, CA passed NY in 1970, this scenario's New York remained the biggest State until the 1980 census. Still, the trend is largely comparable, and although CS's demographic growth has slowed down since 1990, its status remains unchallenged. Aside from that, CS is a densely populated and largely urban State. Although it contains some vast deserted areas in the East (the "Inland Empire"), the coast hosts the gigantic megalopolis built around Los Angeles and San Diego. This is the land of sprawling cities, hot weather, and, obviously, Latino politics. Making up 38.6% of the VAP (compared to 22.6% in Pacific and 30.5% in California), Hispanics would play a major role in the State's political life.

CS Presidential election results, 1960-2012:


Politically, this is probably the most significant Democratic conquest of the current realignment. Before 1992, CS had never supported a Democrat aside from LBJ. Since 1992, however, the Democratic Presidential candidate has always carried it. The realignment is undeniable. Back in the days California del Sur used to be a pretty conservative State. In 1964, it was one of Goldwater's best States outside of the South (he did better there than in Indiana, for example). Favorite sons Nixon and Reagan had no trouble prevailing there. The first, while he struggled a bit against Kennedy, distanced Humphrey by 8 points and broke 50% despite Wallace's presence. As for Reagan, he trounced Carter by 22 points in 1980, and four years later he became the only candidate to break 60% in the State.

Although the importance of 1992 is often exaggerated in the political evolution, it really was a pivotal moment for California Del Sur. With Bush's percentage dropping by more than 20 points, the State went from a solid Republican margin to a solid Democratic one without any transition. The trend continued in the following years. CS reelected Clinton with an absolute majority, then saw Gore prevail by the exact same margin over Bush. 2004 marked a step backwards, with Bush taking an honorable 47% and proving that the State could still be somewhat competitive. However, in the Obama years, CS is beginning to look like a Democratic stronghold. It remains less Democratic than OTL California - even in 2008, Obama couldn't get above 60% - but still enough to keep the State outside of the competition. Maybe Romney could have tried campaigning there, but it's hard to see him gain more than a couple points.

While CS is probably gone for the GOP at the Presidential level, its statewide politics would be pretty interesting to follow. The State retains some notable conservative tendencies: it went 55% in favor of Prop 8, only 52% in favor of Prop 30, and back in 1994 it gave a whopping 62.5% to Prop 187. It also gave Schwarzenegger a landslide in 2003 and 2006. The main factor of the Democrats' strength would obviously be Hispanics, but their leanings at the local level might vary. The right kind of Republican could still prevail in Senatorial or Gubernatorial races. Its legislatures are probably safely in Democratic hands, though.

There's not need for fancy maps to describe CS's geography, I think you can all guess it pretty easily. Los Angeles County is the base of Democratic strength, and without it the State would actually be fairly competitive - if not GOP-leaning. In all Presidential elections since 1960, LA County has been more Democratic than the State as a whole. And, a testimony of its impact, in all elections since 1980, all the other counties (except the heavily Hispanic Imperial) have been more Republican than the State as a whole. In 2012, it cast 45% of the State's total vote. The only real base of support left to Republicans is Orange County. San Diego County, once solidly Republican (it gave Bush over 60% in 1988), has seen a massive Democratic trend. The remaining three counties are still relatively marginal, but are also trending Democratic. Thus, it wouldn't be surprising to see a Democrat eventually surpass Reagan's 1984 peak (provided they win nationally).

Capital: Riverside

Governor: I feel creative... and since the race was in 2010, let's say Steve Cooley

Senators: Antonio Villaraigosa (class 2) and Loretta Sanchez (class 3)

Representatives: I can only assume that the political climate around redistricting would be similar than in OTL California, with a nonpartisan redistricting commission being enacted through popular initiative. As a result, we can keep the original tally of 21D-9R.

[rpryor03]

Very good job, AV! I've enjoyed it.

[Antonio the Sixth]

Thanks!

Anyone else has comments on this final State? I thought it would be a bigger deal for people.

BTW, since I brought it up in this last post, here are all the States where Hispanics make up more than 20% of the VAP. With these modifications, their number has jumped from 6 to 10:
- Rio Grande: 53.4% !!!
- New Mexico: 42.3%
- California del Sur: 38.6%
- California: 30.5%
- South Florida: 27.7%
- Texas: 25.6%
- Arizona: 25.0%
- Jefferson: 24.3%
- Pacific: 22.6%
- Nevada: 22.3%

[Wake Me Up When The Hard Border Ends]

Well done! It's been great following this, reading all about the alternate states, and imagining how different the US could be if these were the states.

Also, on CS, I wouldn't be surprised if some of the residents of California del Sur wanted to transfer LA County into Pacific, for political reasons. Good job on dividing up CA and TX in particular as well, along with the partitioning of Chicagoland.

[Enderman]

It looks pretty great! However, what would be the county map? I'm a bit confused on where are the Republican ones, and the Democtaric ones.

[Mr. Smith]

Los Angeles, Ventura, San Diego, Orange, Riverside, San Bernardino, and Imperial if I'm not mistaken.


More importantly though, what's the graph of the three and the real California look like?

[KingSweden]

If we could vote on it, I'm sure most people on this forum would vote this Best Timeline (I certainly would). Great work, Antonio.

[Goldwater]

It's been a great series, Antonio!

BTW, would it possible to see the full election maps for 1960-2012? I'm particularity interested to see if the 2000 and 1960 results. No need to rush it of course, I'm just curious.

[Antonio the Sixth]

Thanks, everybody!

More importantly though, what's the graph of the three and the real California look like?

You thought I could forget such an important piece of the project? Here it is!



As you can see, it started off with the two northern States leaning Democrat while CS leaned Republican. 1972 seems to have been a rather anomalous year, with McGovern doing comparatively very well in all of California (he even kept Nixon below his national margin in his native State of California del Sur!). Democrats began losing ground in California right after that: in 1976, it was the perfect bellwhether, and in subsequent elections it had a slight GOP lean (becoming, after 1992, the most Republican of the three States). Meanwhile, both PC and CS began their Democratic trend in 1984. Their movement over the 1980-2012 was comparable, but since PC started off as a Democratic and CS as Republican they remain very different. CS realigned to the Democrats in 1992, and saw a few ebbs and flows in the following years, but in 2008 and 2012 saw a pronounced Democratic trend. Pacific, meanwhile, saw a 19-point trend over the span of two elections (1996-2004) going from safe D to one-party State levels. Finally, California slipped further to the right in the late 1990s and early 2000s, peaking at R+14 in 2004, but by 2012 it has moved back to Swing State territory in 2012.

[Antonio the Sixth]

BTW, would it possible to see the full election maps for 1960-2012? I'm particularity interested to see if the 2000 and 1960 results. No need to rush it of course, I'm just curious.

...and yes, that's exactly what I had in mind next! I'm gonna run through all Presidential elections from 1960 to 2012, similarly to what I did for the States. Brace yourselves!

[Mr. Smith]

I actually have results for the strongest and closest of the Alternates.

[Cranberry]

Antonio, this series has been terrific - I can only hope you will have so many extra content for us left!

[Antonio the Sixth]

I actually have results for the strongest and closest of the Alternates.

You calculated them by yourself? You could simply have asked, I can tell you the details of any State you're interested in.

[Antonio the Sixth]

...and let's begin with 1960! I won't be able to give you the complete run-up that I plan on doing for other elections, because I lack data on the 1950 census to calculate EV numbers as well as data from 1956 to calculate swing and trend statistics. But anyway, here's what I have:

First, the standard Atlas map:


Under the 1962 Apportionment, Kennedy would have won 286 EVs, Nixon 240, and the unpledged electors 12 (if we count the faithless OK elector, then it's Nixon 239 and Byrd 13). Extrapolating from RL apportionment numbers from 1952, I calculated that under the normal scenario Kennedy should win a bit more, probably about 290 electors. It's slightly down from his actual 303 score (probably due to the splits in NY, PA, IL and TX, which are only countered by OH and CA), but still an impressive result if you consider that the PV was basically tied.

Now let's have a loot at the PVI map:


For the record, the cutoffs are 5, 10 and 20 (eg, the lightest shade means the State leans toward a party by less than 5 points, and the darkest means that it leans by more than 20 points). Again, considering the tied national vote, the PVI basically equals the winning margin (except for Hawaii, which Kennedy won by a mere 0.06 points!).

Anyway, this map does a good job at explaining Kennedy's broad victory: he won a sh*tload (and I mean a sh*tload) of States by ridiculously narrow margins. While this map takes out his razor-thin Illinois win (looks like Daley's not needed after all!), it adds California and Pacific to the column of States Kennedy won by less than 5 points. In fairness, Nixon also scored a lot of close wins, so this is above all a testimony of how de-polarized politics were in that era. Also an interesting detail: as you can see, among the States that stand out in Kennedy's column, there is MA, NY, a bunch of Deep South States, but also Rio Grande. So LBJ really did do a good job at delivering his home State.

Finally, a few statistics about the States (there will be more for the next elections ):
- Most Democratic: Georgia (PVI +24.95)
- Most Republican: Nebraska (PVI -24.30)
- Closest: Hawaii (PVI -0.10)
- Bellwether: Hawaii (PVI -0.10)
- Tipping point (under the 1962 apportionment): New Jersey (PVI +0.64)

Not much has changed, then.

[Enderman]

Awesome!

[Mr. Smith]

How would Hawaii vote for Nixon here (great map btw)? It was a razor thin margin for Kennedy IRL, and it hasn't been altered far as I can tell.

Anyway of the Alternates:

Massachusetts is the tops for Kennedy (60.7%) (though clearly behind the unaltered Georgia), Nevada is the closest (50.6%) (clearly a greater divide than Hawaii IRL and should be on this)

Ohio is the best for Nixon (58.9%) [once again the unaltered Nebraska is the ultimate Anti-Kennedy here, just as IRL], and North Florida is the closest (50.1%) [or should be, not Hawaii, anyway it's the same as IRL California]

[Antonio the Sixth]

As I said in my post, Kennedy won Hawaii by 0.06 points. Since he won the national PV by 0.16 points, this means that Hawaii has a 0.1 points Republican PVI.

Also, the closest Kennedy State that I've tampered with actually isn't Michigan (which Kennedy won by 1.94), but rather Nevada (which he won by 1.25). Yes, the modification of Nevada was pretty marginal, but the same could be said about Michigan.

[Mr. Smith]

For 1964


Strongest Johnson: Massachusetts (76.9%) [not as strong as Rhode Island IRL, but slightly ahead of  he actual Massachusetts]
Closest Johnson: Oregon (54.9%) [Idaho IRL, but since Idaho was absorbed...it still shows]

Strongest Goldwater: Mississippi (87.9%) still, North Florida (53.3%) of the alternates
Closest Goldwater: Arizona (50.45%) still,  and still North Florida (53.3%) of the alternates by virtue of being the only one to turn to Goldwater

[Antonio the Sixth]

Are you going to spoil all my election summaries?

[Mr. Smith]

Are you going to spoil all my election summaries?

Alright, alright I'll cut it out , not like he map is here yet.

[Antonio the Sixth]

1964



Lyndon Johnson: 479 (-7)
Barry Goldwater: 59 (+7)

LBJ's landslide win obviously isn't in any way threatened by these geographic adjustments. The only effective change is brought by the Florida split: instead of a close LBJ win, we have Goldwater winning the Northern State by 6.6 points while Johnson sweeps the South by 8.8 points. Apart from that, there is not much to see here. Some divides do highlight notable differences (Ohio is still much more Republican-friendly than Erie, and CS ends up being one of Goldwater's best States outside of the South). On the other hand, other States remain surprisingly uniform, like the PA and NY splits (actually, Johnson does slightly better in Adirondack than in New York). It's also impressive to see Johnson break 60% in Jefferson, a traditional Republican stronghold. Clearly the home State effect was at work here IRL, and if this scenario was actually in place he might not have done so well.

Here is what it looks like in net PVI terms:


In a tied race (assuming uniform national swing), the Electoral College would end up like that:
Johnson: 293 (-5)
Goldwater: 245 (+5)

Again, the Electoral College structure is almost unchanged, still working to Johnson's favor due to the millions of wasted Goldwater votes in the Deep South. LBJ is hurt by the split in Ohio and Texas, but gains thanks to the California one. The Northeast still stands out as his main area of strength, along with the industrial Great Lakes area, Appalachia, Hawaii, and obviously his home State of Rio Grande. Goldwater does well in the old Confederacy, as well as in the Plains and the Mountain West, but also the southwestern corner with AZ and CS. One surprise is Chicago, where LBJ underperformed compared to his national result due to the suburbs' love for Goldwater.

Finally, here is the swing/trend map:


The extreme northeastern corner (NE+AD), and to a lesser extent MA, OH and the Appalachian area, are the areas where Johnson most improved over Kennedy. Clearly his candidacy benefited from the support of traditionally moderate rural northerners who strongly supported Civil Rights, as well as by populists in the Outer South and Midwest who supported LBJ's Great Society program. Goldwater improved particularly in the South (obviously) but also, as said in the Southwestern corner. It's interesting to see Texas stand out compared to its western neighbors and trend GOP, a proof of its more southern nature. Also, a clearer Democratic trend emerges on the Pacific coast, as California's rightward shift was almost exclusively due to CS.

State Data:
- Most Democratic: Hawaii (PVI +34.94)
- Most Republican: Mississippi (PVI -96.86)
- Closest: Arizona (margin -0.99)
- Bellwether: Colorado (PVI +0.49) - Jefferson is really close though
- Tipping point: Iowa (PVI +1.39) - Colorado and Texas would also have to flip
- Strongest Democratic Trend: Hawaii (trend +35.04)
- Strongest Republican Trend: Mississippi (trend -108.37)
- Most Stable (absolute): Arkansas (swing +5.53)
- Most Stable (relative): California (trend -0.26)

[Antonio the Sixth]

OK, I plan to keep the current rythm and cover two elections per week. Does that work for you guys? And how do you like the format?

[Cranberry]

This format is great! I beg for more!

[Enderman]

This format is great! I beg for more!